Frances' journals: Streetcar Named Desire and Crime and Punishment

Frances’ Journal # 1: Crime & Punishment

My first impression of this book was a good one. I was instantly attracted to the title, because it sounds like a riveting drama. Then, as I delved into the book, confusion soon followed. For starters, the names of the characters are too complicated, and when their names begin with the same letter (like “R” for example), I start to lose track of who’s who. This book reminded me of The Jungle in that way, because I remember when I first started reading it; I was aggravated by the weird names that were continuously introduced. It seems like new characters with strange names keep being introduced. Upon studying, I’ve discovered that this book is quite comparable to Dostoevsky’s own life (aside from the murders, I would assume).

Raskolnikov also reminds me of Dorian Gray, because he is characterized as handsome, with an evident touch of lunacy. Just like Mr. Gray, he may be aesthetically pleasing, but mentally; he’s hideous (too bad there’s no portrait to reveal his inner psychosis). Also similar to Dorian Gray, Raskolnikov seems to have a love interest that is concealed by all the issues that he is dealing with. I think the author is trying to convey a message of insecurity and uncertainty to the reader about Raskolnikov’s character. Though he committed an unjust, awful act, he isn’t a complete criminal. I think the best description of Raskolnikov’s behavior is the fact that desperation can often lead to duplicity; which seems to have the ability to ultimately result in demise.

























Frances’ Journal # 2: Crime & Punishment

The only illness Raskolnikov seems to be plagued by is guilt, well-deserving, rightful guilt. In fact, I think Raskolnikov is plagued by three G’s: greed, gloom, and guilt. His greed and desire for money sank him into an abyss of depression, ultimately inspiring him to commit an atrocious act. After doing so, he realized it was completely unnecessary, and obviously wrong; thus ensued his guilt.

After reading further, the book slightly reminds me of Marquez’s Chronicle of a Death Foretold. More and more people are finding out about what Raskolnikov did, my curiosity lies in finding out if anyone will confront the authorities and turn him in. Even though he’s been daintily talked into turning himself in, it isn’t enough. It seems like soon everyone will know what he did, and everyone will be too timid to relinquish the truth; or at least force him to do so. However, I am assuming eventually Raskolnikov will be punished for his crime; otherwise the title would be for naught, yes?

I also think Raskolnikov’s surroundings may have contributed to his maniacal actions. The people that he surrounds himself with, willingly or unwillingly, don’t seem to be coherent either. His location seems to be the setting for misfortune, psychiatric malfunction, and blatant misdeed. The psychological aspect of this book is also very strong. There seems to be a lot of dreams and nightmares involving death and disgust. “They [dreams] are a completely valid psychological phenomenon, specifically the fulfillment of wishes; they can be classified in the continuity of comprehensible waking mental states; they are constructed through highly complicated intellectual activity.” From a Freudian perspective, dreams are a continuation of the actual mental state; it is no coincidence that Raskolnikov suffered from nightmares after committing murder.





















Frances’ Journal # 3: Crime & Punishment

"If he has a conscience he will suffer for his mistake. That will be punishment-as well as the prison." (Dostoevsky, 230) I think Raskolnikov’s true punishment was being locked away for several years without human embrace or ability to receive tender love. This reverts back to his initial introduction as a character, a wily, isolated man. His crime was remaining isolated and wanting to avoid the world. Being able to love someone and to share intimate feelings for someone legitimately allowed him to express his emotion, and clearly acknowledge his wrongdoing. This then allowed him to finally repent, after many moments of ignorance and an all too long period of evasiveness.

A large theme in the book is irony. Though Raskolnikov minutely questions his motives, when he eavesdrops and hears that the world would be better off without the pawnbroker, he feels justified in what he wants to do. Then, when he hears that she will be home alone, he feels extremely justified and even believes that circumstances have been manipulated for him to do what he wants. That instance correlates to real life, because oftentimes people want to do something even though they realize it’s wrong. When they receive what they perceive as even the slightest bit of justification, they run wild with the concept.

“…but those sick pale faces were bright with the dawn of a new future, of a full resurrection into a new life. They were renewed by love; the heart of each held infinite sources of life for the heart of the other." (Dostoevsky, 471) In the end, though Raskolnikov was rightfully imprisoned, I think it isn’t an outlandish statement to say that his soul was set free by the truth and by being able to acknowledge his love for someone else. His longing to be with the one he desired and to no longer crave isolation paved the way for his release from eternal upset.






















Frances’ Journal # 1: A Streetcar Named Desire

I’m thinking this story’s going to be awesome. Look at the title. Look at the good-looking fellow on the cover. What could possible go wrong? I open it up and look at the character list. I can already tell it’s set in an older time. I can tell so by the picture and by the fact that two of the characters are “a Negro Woman” and “a Mexican Woman.” Before I get to the character list actually, the author has me laughing when he says that he “…mistook the chocolate sauce for gravy and poured it over the sirloin steak.” So, now I’m thinking that this guy is cool and he clearly stumbled upon affluence, probably with this book.

I immediately formed my impression of the characters. Stella is a humble lady; she lives a modest life, yet enjoys every second of it. I didn’t like Blanche from the very beginning. She came to see her sister, yet at every chance she got, she seemed to belittle the new life she made for herself (and seemed to actually like). The loss of Belle Reve seems to have made Blanche bitter, probably also because they’ve lost all their relatives as well. I think Blanche has more issues than she is willing to let on. I definitely think she has a secret alcohol addiction and is in dire financial straits. The men in the book seemed to be average, sports enthusiasts, and beer guzzlers.

I liked how the name of the book was used in the play. I always like when authors do that, even though some people think it’s tacky. I’m still wondering how the story will end up, and the point of it. I’m curious as to what character the story will revolve around. Also, isn’t it a coincidence that their names are Stella and Stanley?


Frances’ Journal # 2: A Streetcar Named Desire

The description of Stanley on Page 29 allowed me to instantaneously harvest enmity for him. In short, he revolts me due to his basic classification as a womanizer. His first interactions with Blanche allude to his vile and disturbing background. “It’s hard to stay looking fresh.” (Williams, 30) I liked this quote from Blanche. It made me laugh; I guess Tennessee Williams was more modern than he even knew. For a while in the middle of the play, it seems like Blanche is hitting on Stanley and maybe they’re even flirting with one another; which is weird on several different levels. Then at the end of Scene 2, Blanche admits she was flirting with Stanley, which is gross. I think this is foreshadowing something that will happen between Blanche and Stanley.

I think it’s so cool to see where that little saying “Stella!” comes from. I was actually really happy when I read that. Obviously, Stanley is abusive. He has serious problems. When Blanche was talking about how she teaches high school students that kind of aren’t appreciative of what she teaches them, I thought of Mrs. Tramantano, even though we always appreciate what she has to teach us (insert laugh). Mitch seems to hint at the fact that Stella and Stanley engage in violent interactions often. Females are once again portrayed as fools. There’s no way she should have gone back to him after he abused her, especially since she’s with child. I think Stella is stupid. It is ridiculous that she allows…desire…to keep her in a relationship with Stanley. Aside from that, I appreciate how reference to the book title is once again incorporated into the book on Page 70. When Stella and Blanche refer to riding in a streetcar named Desire, I think metaphorical value is hidden in their words. They each have their respective set of secrets, possibly driven by dark desire; particularly Blanche it seems.






Frances’ Journal # 3: A Streetcar Named Desire

I was disappointed at how the men in this book were portrayed, as Blanche once called Stanley, they were “bestial.” Towards the end, it seemed almost as if Mitch had been swindled by Stanley into hating Blanche as much as he did. “You’re not clean enough to bring in the house with my mother.” (Williams, 121) At that point, I knew all respect for Blanche from any of the characters was gone because of conniving Stanley.

I am very upset and displeased with the play’s ending. In the end, it seems like Stella chose her husband over her sister. I don’t think it’s so much that she doesn’t believe her sister, but the fact that she doesn’t want to believe her sister; for fear of having to start a new life, or even more disgusting, for fear of losing Stanley, whose only attributes seem to be physical and seem to lie in the bedroom. Stanley repulsed me at every possible turn. From the introduction, I annotated that I didn’t like Stanley, and then he seemed to want to ruin Blanche’s life by exposing her darkest secrets to people she loved; then I REALLY didn’t like him. He got his way with Blanche, he got his way with Mitch, and he got his way with Stella. The only winner in this book seems to be him, in my opinion, the character who is also the antagonist.

Aside from Stanley, this book as a whole was superb. I think it would be awesome to watch the movie to see how it compares and contrasts to the text. Of course, it was intended to be in motion, so it’s probably just as good if not better. “-I have always depended on the kindness of strangers,” Blanche says just before she’s about to be whisked off to the madhouse. Blanche reverberates back to her younger days, when she had several encounters with strangers that would haunt her for many years. Blanche seems ready to accept her fate, though unknowingly; as Stella and the rest of the characters watch, and some anticipate, her departure. I think her leaving and the holding of Stella’s baby as Stanley finds an open place in her blouse signifies the hurt Stanley will eminently cause their child…and Stella.